Kenai

Court rejects First Amendment challenge to Homer City Council recall

A Superior Court judge has declined to stop an upcoming Homer City Council recall election, rejecting a challenge that argued the recall violated the freedom of speech rights of the three council members facing the recall.

In a ruling issued late Tuesday, Superior Court Judge Erin Marston wrote that the recall petition was legally sufficient and disagreed with the claim that the petitions violated the council members' First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Marston said the Alaska Constitution provides that all publicly elected officials be subject to recall and guards against any barriers that would make it impossible for a citizen to bring forth that recall petition, such as rulings that would make it necessary for legal counsel to assist with the petition.

"To conclude that anytime a recall petition is based in part or in whole on what a politician said is protected by the First Amendment would be to eviscerate the recall statute to such an extent that the populace would almost never be able to seek recall of any of their elected officials," the ruling stated. "It is not what the Alaska Constitution and statutes contemplate and it is an unreasonable interpretation of the law."

The suit, in which the Alaska Civil Liberties Union of Alaska participated, involved a petition for a recall vote filed against three city council members — Donna Aderhold, David Lewis and Catriona Reynolds — who introduced a controversial resolution that called for the city to support inclusivity of all people, especially those of minority populations. The resolution was voted down 5-1.

A draft form of the resolution called for the city to resist efforts to profile undocumented immigrants and other vulnerable populations, echoing so-called "sanctuary city" measures adopted elsewhere. It was subsequently edited to remove explicit references to undocumented immigrants as well as references to President Donald Trump, but not before being circulated on social media sites, drawing an explosive response from opponents.

The petition for recall was requested shortly after the vote, and also included a reference to another resolution, which expressed opposition to the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline. That resolution passed in November after Mayor Bryan Zak broke the 3-3 tie in favor.

Homer City Clerk Jo Johnson ruled two of the three claims of the petition had substance and certified the petition, setting a recall election date of June 13.

ADVERTISEMENT

In rejecting the legal challenge, Marston ruled that it was not the court's place to second-guess the clerk's reasonable interpretation.

"The Supreme Court has instructed courts to not review recall petitions in such a strict manner that petitioners would have no practical chance of qualifying for the ballot without the detailed advice of a lawyer," he wrote. "To do so would negate the recall process for citizens of small communities and school districts in rural Alaska."

In a statement released Tuesday afternoon, Sarah Vance, spokesperson for Heartbeat of Homer, a group organized to support the recall petitions, said the organization is very pleased with the ruling.

"It is our goal that every voter in Homer have an equal voice at the ballot box regarding the recall special election set for June 13," Vance wrote.

Vance contested the council members' claim that their free speech rights had been violated and continued that the lawsuit itself proves them unfit for office.

"Heartbeat of Homer is prepared to take whatever actions necessary to ensure these three council members will no longer serve as our elected officials," Vance wrote.

Aderhold said she was disappointed in the judge's ruling because of its precedent.

"My interest in participating in the lawsuit is to protect the integrity of our election system and ensure recalls are held for valid grounds," she said in a statement. "I pride myself on truthfulness, following process, and being open and deliberative. If council members can face recall for representing constituents by sponsoring resolutions and voting, which is what we were elected to do, then voters lose their representation and we are heading for chaos."

This story first appeared in the Homer Tribune and is republished here by permission.

ADVERTISEMENT